If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

i just commented about this in the hammock stand thread, i was saying the best way might be to equalize each stake individually to the anchor point, the same way climbers equalize multiple pieces of gear into a single anchor point. a properly equalized anchor spreads out the load evenly among all the points/stakes at the same time, with the inline method, the front stake takes a much higher % of the load and would pull much easier, from here, it's likely going to be a chain reaction.

the perimeter loaded tarp is just something i call it, sounds about right anyways. the idea is that there are no "regular pull tabs" regular pull tabs being the patch that goes across the corner of the tarp to disperse the load comming from the guyline. the load is distributed to those stitches that go across the patch, usually 3-4" wide. this is the weakest point in the tarp.

silnylon is strong, but heavy wind hitting a tarp broadside can create alot of force, the more stitches you can distribute this force amongst, the more force the tarp can handle. the idea is to have a structural ring of webbing/edge binding (1/2" gg ribbon is strong enough, the less stretch the better, bias tape would not work) that wraps around the tarp. where the webbing turns the corner, the sil is folded back, and you can just "hook" the corner of the webbing, this is your anti-pull tab so to speak. since the webbing follows a curved edge, tension on the pull tab will create lateral movement of the webbing, pulling the sides of the tarp out in all directions at once, makes for a really good pitch. basically it is alot like a square trampoline, there are springs all the way around the perimeter, not just at the corners. a perimeter loaded tarp will distribute the force to the stitches around the perimeter like the trampoline, it's 30 feet or so all the way around, that's thousands of stitches to disperse the force amongst.

the end pull tabs are just regular pull tabs, the webbing terminates underneath them at each end. since there is a ridgeline seam, there is no need to try and spread the force out with a reinforcement patch. my ridge seam has 4 layers, i feel the strongest method of attachment is to sew a single piece of webbing straight down the seam for several inches, the webbing is the same width as the seam. this is a good example of the inline method discussed above. i use a zig zag with a pretty close stitch length and stitch down the webbing, i use enough to make the stitches at least 6-7" long, the other end of the webbing is just folded under to create the pull tab and stitched to the opposite side of the seam in the same manner, it is not necessary to make the bottom side as long as the top, just long enough to meke a suficiently strong loop.

I'm not convinced that the amount of pull that can be supported by this increases as an exponential function of the number of stakes, but my gut instinct is that if you use N stakes the pull that can be resisted is greater than N times the pull that can be resisted by one stake.

Grizz

I agree, I think the advantage of this is that the angle of pull on the 2nd, 3rd stakes is essentially parallel to the ground. The pull out force is highest, in my opinion, when the angle of pull is more perpendicular to the stake. Thats why it helps to put the stakes in at an angle when the guy line is going upward to the tarp. So, whatever the difference in pull out load between pulling on the stake in a direction parallel to the ground and pulling on the stake at what ever the angle is from the 1st stake to the tarp, that differnce should be added for the 2nd, 3rd, stakes. If this delta force (ha, pun intended!) is called dF, and the force to pull out the first stake is F, then the total pullout force would be N*F + (N-1)*dF

I think the advantage of this technique over equalizing, as in climbing anchors (as Warbonnet describes), where the guy line would split and "Y" to each stake is two fold - 1) the inherent "Y" angle when equalizing adds another component of force increasing load on the stakes, and 2) the direction of pull on 2nd, 3rd, stake is kept parallel to the ground.

With climbing anchors in rock, there is essentially no elasticity, so if you don't equalize, the first anchor takes all the load until it fails, then the second anchor takes load, so there is no load sharing. In soil, the stakes are more elastic, so as soon as the first stake moves a little (which they can do without failing because they are in soil), the 2nd picks up load as Griz describes.

I agree, I think the advantage of this is that the angle of pull on the 2nd, 3rd stakes is essentially parallel to the ground. The pull out force is highest, in my opinion, when the angle of pull is more perpendicular to the stake. Thats why it helps to put the stakes in at an angle when the guy line is going upward to the tarp. ...

Actually, you don't want the stake and guy line perpendicular. You want the angle between the guy line and the stake to be greater than 90 degrees, i.e., the angle measured from the guy line towards the top of the stake. So that the stake is tilted way back, away from the guy line.

If the guy line is perpendicular to the stake, then all of the force from the guy line is pulling laterally on the stake. The stake is taking all of the pulling force.

If the angle is less than 90 degrees, then the guy line will slip towards the top and off the stake. The stake is tilted towards the guy line. The frictional forces between the line and the stake is pulling the stake out of the ground.

If the angle is greater than 90 degrees, then the guy line is pulled towards the ground and the ground is taking some of the force and relieving the force on the stake. The greater the angle, the more of the guy line force is absorbed by the ground instead of the stake. Of course, you have to compromise, by still having enough stake in the ground to hold. Here the frictional forces are actually pulling the stake into the ground and holding it better.

You then want the same arrangement with the line from the first stake to the second stake and then second to third, etc if more are wanted. It looks like cascading lines from stake to stake.

You want the guy line from the tarp tied to the stakes right at ground level, so that the guy line to the next stake is tied to the top of the stakes get the multiplying effect of the top of the stake acting as a lever arm. The line at the ground has essentially a zero lever arm, whereas the line at the top has a lever arm of the length of the stake above ground.

That lever arm is what really gives you the multiplying effect of the chain ganged stakes.

If you used a really long stake and had a lot above ground and chain ganged the stakes, that lever arm gives you a lot of multiplying holding power.

the pro marlow is a polyester core w/polyester cover, 2mm, 200#. sounds like it's just a slightly bigger/stronger version of the mld 1.75 cord. i liked it alot, it was nice and stiff so it didn't tangle, and the cover is nice and tight, and holds knots well, and was easy to untie, it is heavier, but it was a pleasure to use compared to mason line.

i just got the zing it today, so we'll see how it compares performance wise, looks like my mason line is going to get replaced by one of these though.

the pro marlow is a polyester core w/polyester cover, 2mm, 200#. sounds like it's just a slightly bigger/stronger version of the mld 1.75 cord. i liked it alot, it was nice and stiff so it didn't tangle, and the cover is nice and tight, and holds knots well, and was easy to untie, it is heavier, but it was a pleasure to use compared to mason line.

i just got the zing it today, so we'll see how it compares performance wise, looks like my mason line is going to get replaced by one of these though.

Yes that Lash-It and Zing-It are really nice stuff. The more I'm using the Lash-It, the more I like it. I don't like bright colors for guy line cords and so opted for the gray Lash-It instead.

I have gotten to dislike covered line if it isn't really necessary for some reason. I've found the covering makes kinking of the the core worse and then the kinks start tangling the line. I guess in a marine application, they have long runs which are a lot straighter than I usually find and the covering and kinking works better there.

I've found that for the really small diameter lines like guy lines, I like plain coated much better. The kinking problem almost completely disappears. I've found that I like the Samthane coating that Samson uses on their lines. Works good for knots and friction knots like the Prussic. ot some of the 3 mm Amsteel Blue when H4U did the group buy, and I'm finding that stuff is really nice also. It has the Samthane coating and it works really well there.

i did a little stretch test on about 15' or so of line, while the covered polyester doesn't stretch anywhere near as much as mason line does, the zing it stretches way less, and since most knots i tie with it will be slippery/exploding, untying isn't much of a problem. i really like the stregth and weight of the zing it.

great thread TF, you inspired me to test some different guylines.

i also love the figure 8 coil, and thanks to whoever brought that up origionally, you really can toss the coil and have it come out perfectly. i have also seen people use this method to coil line onto a straight stick, although at the time i didn't realize how it was done, but it's exactly the same method. i might try coiling it on some stakes and see how that works.

the stuff only weighs just under 1/2g/ft, it would be nothing to carry around 50'-100' just for spare.

Would the lb. test of the zing it, make it where it could possibly tear the tarp in high winds? I would rather fix a guy line than my tarp out in the field.

Dwight

Psalm 19:1-3 "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard."